3 ms·
Both things sound like massive false positive generators when used at scale. Also, where do those robots come from that can do all these experiments beyond "tri
by RandomLensman 3y ago
Both things sound like massive false positive generators when used at scale. Also, where do those robots come from that can do all these experiments beyond "trivial" setups? The "robot scientists" sound very sci-fi outside of standardized high volume automation.
- randcraw 3y agoYeah, I've found that generating (scientific) hypotheses is easy. But generating more than combinatoric variants of existing hypotheses is hard, and harder still is to propose an insightful interpretation of results or a creative model for a mechanism of action that better explains the observed outcomes. I see nothing in today's 'deep AI' that addresses these desiderata. And I don't see the current AI strategy of accumulating only existing knowledge as the means to those ends either. Optimization of learning can only learn more facts or do it faster, not think with more creativity or innovation. Memory is but a small part of genius.